Helium Behavior and Surface Roughening of Solid Tungsten Q. Hu, M. Andersen, S. Sharafat, and N. Ghoniem University of California Los Angeles High Average Power Laser Meeting Naval Research Laboratory Washington, DC March 3-4, 2005
Helium Retention and Release: Outline Helium Retention and Release: IFE Experiments Modeling Surface Roughening Defect-diffusion-deformation (EWG) Stress-induced (ATG) thermo-mechanical Fatigue Conclusions & Future Directions
IFE: Local APA (He/ W-atom) per shot SRIM:
Comparison of DPA (Displacement / W-atom):
Comparison of APA (He/W-atom):
HEROS: Temperature Profile Input UNC Temperature temporal Profile: (uniform through the thickness) Temperature C 2000 850 Snead, Oct.’04 48 60 Time sec IEC Temperature = 940C (constant & uniform)
HEROS: Temperature Profile Input IFE Temperature Temporal Profile: (uniform through the thickness) current goal Temperature C 1800 1200 Sharafat, June’04 110-3 0.2 Time sec Efforts are under way to reach Tmax=2800oC
IEC: Bubble Concentration (cm-3) Evolution 6x1017 He/cm2 940 °C 1 mm Helium E = 30 keV T = 940oC 7x1015 He/cm2-s
IEC: Bubble Radius Evolution 100 nm 10 nm 1 nm E = 40 keV T = 940oC 7x1015 He/cm2-s
UNC (angled carbon foil): Bubble Concentration (cm-3) Snead, Oct. ‘04 Helium E = 800 kev - 1200 keV; T = 850oC – 2000 oC ; He = 3x1016 He/m2
UNC: Bubble Radius Evolution 10 nm 100 nm 1 nm E = 800 kev - 1200 keV; T = 850oC – 2000 oC ; He = 3x1016 He/m2
IFE: Bubble Concentration (cm-3) Evolution current planned Helium Energy & Impl. Profile: Debris + Burn; Tmax=1800oC
IFE: Bubble Radius Evolution 10 nm 1 nm Energy & Impl. Profile: Debris + Burn; Tmax=1800oC
Comparison of Bubble Density Range During a Pulse : 108 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 Cb (1/cm3) IFE (Burn + Debris) ~ 3 um UNC (carbon film) ~ 1.7 um IEC (40 keV) ~ 0.3 um Peak Bubble Density
Why do Surfaces become Rough? Does roughness increase or decrease? What Determines the Length Scale? Will Roughness Saturate? Will Cracks form from Rough Surfaces?
X-rays, Laser, and Ions all Induce Roughness Latkowski et.al, JNM, submitted Kawakami & Ozawa, Applied Surface Science 218 (2003) Nd-Yag Laser 532 nm Renk, HAPL- Feb 04, Powder Met.
Helium Implantation Induces Roughness!! Tokunaga, et al., JNM, 329-333 (2004)
Mechanisms of Surface Roughening Emelyanov-Wa1graef -Ghoniem (EWG) Defect diffusion coupled with deformation Asaro-Tiller-Grinfeld (ATG) Balance between surface strain (destabilizing) and curvature (stabilizing) Phys.Rev.L, in pres D. Walgraef, N.M. Ghoniem, and J. Lauzeral, "Deformation Patterns in Thin Films Under Uniform Laser Irradiation", Phys. Rev. B, 56, No. 23: 15361-15377 (1997). PDF J. Lauzeral, D. Walgraef, and N.M. Ghoniem, "Rose Deformation Patterns in Thin films Irradiated By Focused Laser Beams", Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, No. 14: 2706-2709 (1997).
Fatigue cracking is initiated at extrusions/inclusions which are formed by Persistent Slip Bands (PBS's) Ma and Laird, 1989 Surface roughness due to PSB/surface interaction in a copper crystal fatigue tested. Strain amplitude of 2 x10-3, 120000 cycles [12, p.328].
Asaro-Tiller-Grinfeld (ATG) Instability y=a cos(wx)
Asaro-Tiller-Grinfeld (ATG) Instability (cont.)
Unstable Region Stable Region
Unstable Region Stable Region
Roughness Growth for HAPL Target
Roughness Decay for Xapper
Conclusions & Future Directions Both UNC and IEC cover different regions of the APA and DPA phase space, however: UNC Bubble concentration are lower than IFE (UNC~1015 /cm3 IFE 1016 /cm3 ) IEC Bubbles densities are comparable with IFE, however they are very close to the surface Based on Experiment plus IFE simulated HEROS results, high helium recycling coefficients may be achieved for IFE Tungsten Armor Impact of large & simultaneous damage caused by D, T & n ? Qualitative understanding of surface roughening Role of defect-induced stresses on roughness? Plan full-scale modeling for thermal+defect+surface evolution for IFE & Dragonfire, Xapper, and Rhepp experiments (Mike Andersen thesis topic). Does roughness saturate, or does it lead to cracks? Modeling fatigue failure & internal cracking with Dislocation Dynamics.
Backup Files
Bubble Kinetics of HEROS The He-Bubble Release code (HEROS) now includes all major Bubble Kinetics phenomena. T1 T1 < T2 T2 Temperature Distance Volume Diffusion Surface Bubble HEROS Bubble Kinetics includes: Random Walk Migration in Temp. Gradient Bubble Volume Diffusion Bubble Surface Diffusion Bubble Coalescence (Brownian) Bubble Coalescence (dT/dx) Bubble Loss at Free Surfaces Bubble Loss to Grain Boundaries
4He Debris and Burn Spectra FIRST the “Burns”: start ~ 0.1ms; end ~1ms FOLLOWED by Debris: start ~1ms; end ~ 2ms ? Range in Solid Tungsten (mm)
Bubble Kinetics Reaction + Drift + Coalescence + Surface Loss By Vol Diffusion: + Drift By Surf Diffusion: By Vol Diffusion: + Coalescence By Surf Diffusion: + Surface Loss In first 0.1m:
HEROS: Spatial Model Includes Tungsten Helium 100 mm Precipitates Grain Boundaries Dislocation Lines
Determine APA and DPA Profiles in W per Shot APA : He-atom / W-atom DPA : Displacement / W-atom (damage) SRIM: Input - Ion Type, Ion Energy, Target Material Output - DPA/ion, Ion Range, other damage statistics Threat data is only known at specific ion energies. Pick small bin-size to interpolate between known data points. Add Damage and Ion Range of all energies and interpolate to get DPA and APA distributions in target material.
IFE: Local DPA (Displacement / W-atom) SRIM:
IEC: Local APA (He/ W-atom) SRIM:
IEC: Local DPA (Displacement / W-atom) SRIM:
UNC (angled carbon film): Local APA (He/ W-atom) SRIM: Snead, Oct. ‘04
UNC (angled carbon film): Local DPA (Displacement / W-atom) SRIM:
Baklava Structure of RHEEP Exposed W-Samples Renk, Oct’04 Dummer, 1998: as received Tungsten
Self Diffusion in Tungsten Mostly along GB Diffusion much faster along GB
Parameters Parameter Value Units g 23 N/m E 411 GPa Q*s 3 (IFE) 5 (Xapper) eV/ atom W 3.45 x 10-29 m3 rs 6.25 x 1018 m-2 P. Bettler and F. Charbonnier, “Activation energy for the surface migration of tungsten atoms in the presence of a high-electric field,” Phys. Rev., Vol 119(1), p.85-93, 1960. Qs = 3.14 eV without field, and 2.44 eV with field.